Rajasthan Court September 1968 Judgments
Mst. Koti Bai and ors. Vs. Mst. Kastoori Bai
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-27-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Raj264; 1968()WLN57
P.N. Singhal, J. 1. As the two courts below have decreed the plaintiffs suit for the recovery of arrears of rent and eviction, the defendants have filed this appeal against the judgment and decree of the Distract Judge of Pali dated January 4, 1968. 2. It is admitted that defendant Sangatmal was a tenant of plaintiff Smt. Kastoori Bai in a shop which carried a monthly rent of Rs. 10. The plaintiff filed the present suit with the allegation that the said Sangatmal paid the rent only up to December 25, 1960 and he became a defaulter thereafter. When a notice of termination of the tenancy was given by the plaintiff, the defendant, it is alleged, made a payment of Rs. 50 on account of the arrears up to May 24, 1931, but did not vacate the shop. The present suit was therefore instituted for his eviction and recovery of damages on July 28, 1961. Thereafter the defendant made a further pay-merit of Rs. 20 on August 2, 1961. He admitted the tenancy but denied the defaults. He pleaded that the ...
Tag this Judgment!Gauri Shankar Vs. Smt. Ganga and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-27-1968
Reported in: 1968WLN41
C.B. Bhargava, J.1. The point to be determined, in this revision application by the decree-holder is whether the delivery of possession in a partition decree after the death of the judgment debtor without bringing his legal representatives on record is void.2. Petitioner and his brother Bhim Shankar had purchased 2/3rd share in a house situated in Jaipur City, Rasta Bhairunji Kundigaran at a court auction about 18 years back. One of the co-owners of that house brought a suit for partition in which Gauri Shankar and Bhim Shanker were also parties and which was finally decreed by this Court on 26-10-1966. The decree provided:The parties will give and take possession in accordance with the terms of the decree within one month from today failing which it would be open to any one or more of them to take necessary steps according to law for compliance with this decree. The parties will bear their own costs in this Court. A final decree shall be drawn accordingly. The list of the various apar...
Tag this Judgment!Mithalal Vs. State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-26-1968
Reported in: 1968WLN117
D.S. Dave, C.J.1. This is a revision application by one Mithalal and it arises in the following circumstances.2. One Bheemraj Kothari presented on 26th Agust, 1967 a complaint before the Sub Inspector Than Mandi, district Udaipur, that one jeep car No. R.J.S. 102 Which belonged to his nephew Mithalal, was entrusted to Prabhulal on the condition that during the election period he would make an earning by hiring it out and that after the elections would be over, the jeep would be returned in running condition, or that, in the alternative, Prabhulal would pay Rs. 6000/- to Mithalal and get the registration certificate transferred in his name. It was further stated that Prabhulal executed a document on 19.8.67 for the return of the jeep and further obtained an amount of Rs. 100/- for its necessary repairs and agreed to deliver possession of the vehicle en 24-8-67, but he did not keep his promise and misappropriated it by delivering it to somebody-else. It was thus alleged that Prabhulal ha...
Tag this Judgment!Kashi Nath Joshi Vs. Satish Chandra Sharma and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-25-1968
Reported in: 1969CriLJ1193; 1968()WLN41
C.M. Lodha, J.1. This is an application by Shri Kashi Nath Joshi, Advocate against Shri Satish Chander Sharma, Assistant Registrar, Go-operative Department, Jodhpur, and Shri Aidan Chowdhary, Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Department, Jodhpur, under Section 8 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 (Act No. 82 of 1952), praying that both the non-petitioners may be punished for committing contempt of Court.2. The facts giving rise to this application lie within a narrow compass and may be stated as under:--The election for the office of the President, Sahakari Upbhogta, Bhandar, Jodhpur, took place on 21st January, 1968, and one Shri Ramdev was elected as the President of the Bhandar. He made an application under Section 37 of the Rajasthan Co. operative Societies Act, 1965 (which, for the sake of brevity, will be hereinafter called as the Act) to the City Magistrate, Jodhpur, for issuing a direction to the officers of the Department as well as the members of the previous Board for handing ...
Tag this Judgment!Tej Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-24-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Raj233; 1968()WLN19
Kan Singh J. 1. We have before us a group of 51 writ petitions in which the several writ petitioners challenge the validity of a scheme of nationalisation relating to Raisinghnagar-Rawatsar route which runs via Padampur-Ganganagar-Hanu-mangarh Junction and Hanumangarh Town. The petitioners seek appropriate writ direction or order against the respondents. As the writ petitions raise identical questions of fact and law, they can conveniently be disposed of together. We may give the relevant facts with reference to Tej Ram's writ petition.2. By a notification dated 9-12-65 the General Manager of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur, hereinafter to be referred as the 'Corporation,' which is the State undertaking, published a notification under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, hereinafter to be referred as the 'Act' read with Rules 3 and 4 of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Services (Development) Rules. 1965, hereinafter to be referred as the 'Rules,' invit...
Tag this Judgment!Govind Ram Vs. Smt. Lila Devi and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-20-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Raj253; 1968()WLN56
ORDERJagat Narayan, J. 1. This is a revision application by the petitioner in a suit for divorce. The petitioner is the husband of respondent No. 1. He brought a suit for divorce against her on the ground of adultery. During the pendency of the suit respondent No. 1 claimed maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The evidence of the respondent was first recorded and 26-11-66 was fixed for recording the evidence of the petitioner. On that date the petitioner and his lawyer were both absent and no application for adjournment was moved. The trial court passed an order in favour of the respondent on the same day. The petitioner subsequently appeared and filed an application for setting aside the order. That application was dismissed by the trial court on 12-4-67. The present application has been filed against that order. A preliminary objection has been taken on behalf of the respondent that the order dated 26-11-66 passed und...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Khan and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-20-1968
Reported in: 1968WLN8
L.S. Mehta, J.1. This is a criminal revision filed by Hari Khan and his son Hakim Maeos against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Bharatpur, dated October 25, 1967, maintaining their conviction under Section 14 read with Section 3 of the Indian Foreigners Act, 1946, as also under Rule 6 read with Rule 3 of the Indian Passport Rules 1950, made by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Deeg.2. The prosecution story is that the accused Hari Khan left India sometime in the year 1947 for Pakistan He came back to India with his son Hakim with passport No SSC-008225, dated August 20, 1956 and visa No. 156050, dated December 26, 1960. His entry into India was recorded at the Check-post-Riilway Station, Amritsar, on February 8, 1961 vide entry No. 2/247-C. Residential permit No. DSB/BPR/RP/51, dated February 10, 1961, was issued to him from the office of the Superintendent of Police, Bharatpur, as required under para 7 of the Foreigners Order, 1948, authorising him to stay in the village Faraska, Pol...
Tag this Judgment!Vijia Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-19-1968
Reported in: 1968WLN171
C.M. Lodha, J.1. The convict Vajia has filed this appeal through jail from his conviction and sentence by the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra, under Section 302, I.P.C. for committing murder of one Navia. We have heard Shri B.L. Kachhawa, amicus curiae, on behalf of the appellant and Shri A.R. Mehta, learned Deputy Government Advocate, and for the reasons, which we shall presently state, we are of the opinion that this appeal must be allowed.2. The prosecution case is that the accused had illicit connections with one Mst. Ganga aunt of the deceased Navia who used to complain to his parents about the visits of the accused to Mst. Ganga. It is alleged that on 13th February, 1965, the accused took Navia with him to his house and killed him with an axe. It is further alleged that in order to make the evidence of murder disappear, he took the dead body of Navia from his house and threw it into a well situate at a distance of about 4 mills from his village Dudsi. The parents of the deceased ...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshwarlal and ors. Vs. the Pareek Commercial Bank Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-18-1968
Reported in: AIR1970Raj12; [1971]41CompCas635(Raj)
ORDERP.N. Shinghal, J. 1. There is a great deal of controversy about the maintainability of these four applications. Common questions of law and fact arise in all of them. They have been argued together, and I shall dispose them of by a single judgment as prayed by the learned counsel for the parties. 2. In order to bring out the controversy in bold relief, I may first state those facts regarding applications Nos. 16 and 17 which are no longer in dispute. The Pareek Commercial Bank Limited, respondent No. 1,hereinafter referred to as the Bank, wasordered to be wound up on July 31, 1952. Vastu Lal Pareek (respondent No. 2) was theChairman of the Bank and orders were passed by this Court for the realisation of various sums of money from him. The Official Liquidator applied for execution of the Court's orders and the execution petitions were transferred by this Court to the Court of the District Judge of Bikaner on February 4, 1960. The District Judge attached certain properties on Februa...
Tag this Judgment!Remeshwarlal and ors. Vs. the Pareek Com. Bank Ltd.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-18-1968
Reported in: 1968WLN47
P.N. Shinghal, J.1. There is a greal deal of controversy about the maintainability of these four applications. Common questions of law and fact arise in all of them. They have been argued together, and I shall dispose them of by a single judgment as prayed by the learned Counsel for the parties.2. In order to bring out the controversy in bold relief, I may first state those facts regarding applications Nos. 16 and 17 which are no longer in dispute. The Pareek Commercial Bank Ltd., respondent No I, hereinafter referred to as the Bank, was ordered to be wound up on July 31, 1952, Vastu Lal Pareek (respondent No. 2) was the Chairman of the Bank and orders were passed by this Court for the realisation of various sums of money from him. The Official Liquidator applied for execution of the court's orders and the execution petitions were transferred by this Court to the court of the District Judge of Bikaner on February 4, 1960 The District Judge attached certain properties on February 13, 19...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »